Radical Republicans, Health Care Reform and Hooliganism

I currently have the misfortune of both my U.S. Senator, Richard Durban, and my congressman, Representative Jerry Costello, refusing to hold town hall meetings to discuss the white hot issue of health care reform.

They're not reluctant to discuss their positions and preferences on the issue. Quite the contrary. They'll meet with you one-on-one to discuss the issue, in their district, home or D.C. office, maybe even in a group of constituents. But not in a large town hall format.

Why they are adamant about not holding such meetings is obvious: they want to avoid the disruptive shouting matches that are spreading like a cancer on our political system, throwing lies and half-truths in the way of clarifying discourse. This is often done at the hands and voices of ignorant or misinformed, perhaps sincere citizens or plants, all in the thrall of their elected and unelected leaders whom they trust to be telling the truth.

Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania experienced the vituperative wrath of a hooligan plant at his town hall on Health Insurance reform. Never was the phrase "in your face," no non-metaphoric.

Then, of course, there was the irrepressible Congressman Barney Frank who showed a talking point plant why he's known as someone who does not suffer fools (or plants) lightly.

Don't get me wrong here. Ignorance of complex political issues and voicing the disagreement that often arises from such ignorance is, to borrow a blast from the Woodstock era, as American as cherry pie," But we're dealing with a different political beast of political discourse right now.

Today, now, at this time in history we're dealing with a corporate lobbyist- Republican party strategy of going from town hall meeting to town hall meeting, from one state or one district to another and starting fires.

We're dealing with protesters, presenting or not presenting themselves as sincere oppositional voters who, in reality, are only trying to intimidate and shut down the conversation and perpetuate corporate and politics-inspired myths. It's a terrorist tactic, only here deploying words, rants, and signs instead of bombs, bullets and Billy clubs.

They accomplish this town hall highjacking by monopolizing the floor, the mike and the oxygen in the venue. All done in order to protect capitalist America from that dreaded political force-socialism, or at least socialism for the poor. Socialism for the corporate leaders-that's okay.

When congressional representatives run from these thugs, as my representatives in congress are now doing, the engine driving our system of government is pushed off the track into a ditch; the voice of all the people is swallowed by the voice of the anarchic few. They are also the people who, when you listen to them and read their signs and slogans, invariably make the explicit or implied assertion that they have God and America on their side.

Don't they always.

You have to wonder, is this REALLY what the Yahoos believe Jesus would do?

MUST IT BE SO?

Yet, outcomes of these hackneyed dramas played out across the country need not be foreordained. The theatrically riled-up mob of the disruptive few need not prevail. Good people with astute leaders can confront them and, with little struggle, tussle, or donnybrook, grandstanding, drama that is the signature of these demonstrations at town hall meetings, dispatch them to the political sewers from which they emerged, reeking of their ginned-up, talk radio-gasified, self-righteousness.

Case in point: In a school gym in Reston, VA, Democratic U.S. Rep. Jim Moran faced a threatening storm at a town hall meeting last Tuesday night, with thousands of interested constituents and maybe a hundred or so strategically placed, anti-health reform activists

People were allowed to carry in signs and placards and were joined by national activists, including anti-abortion campaigner Randall Terry.

DNC chairman, Howard Dean, answered questions about medical malpractice While Mr. Moran controlled the mike, controlled the floor and controlled the warp and woof of the presentation and dialogue with the audience.

Moran put up a series of slides responding to "myths" in the health-care debate, including hot button topics among opponents such as supposed "death panels" which, they argue, would restrict care for the elderly, publicly funded abortion, and the provide for free health care to illegal immigrants.

Moran spoke truth to the threat of crude power simmering in the audience. His supporters, who came to learn and perhaps to stand against the zealots, were ready to help him maintain the peace and order. Repeatedly they raised placards thanking Moran for his clarification and candor as he walked them through the myths and truths of the various versions of the proposed health reform legislation. Clearly, Moran and his people had thought this thing through.

In counterpoint, aside from angry activists pacing in the aisles and being as demonstratively shocked, awed, and outraged at the "lies" Moran was allegedly perpetrating on a naïve public, there was anti-abortion zealot, Randall Terry. He tried to hijack the event when he began loudly braying his accusations of baby killers to anyone within shouting distance. This was a mantra that pleased him and his traveling band of Harpies as he was being "escorted" from the school gym by security. He had already refused the opportunity to speak in a less histrionic fashion so Moran quite rightfully had him ejected.

From a media psychology perspective, what was most notable was this: while C-SPAN was covering the well articulated presentation of complex issues, most commercial newspersons and cameras massed outside the gym, in the hallway, and engulfed the mouthy Terry-insurgents in the manna of attention. I am on TV therefore I am.

In so doing, they turned off the lights of coherent, vitally important discourse continuing in the gym proper. This was clearly a variation on the theme "if it bleeds it leads." It still adds up to the same thing though-if there's heat and light, cover the heat.

But let's be candid here. Ever since the debacle of then-Mayor Richard Daley and the disgraceful mess called the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, the Republicans, own effective protester wrangling. In the Bush-Cheney era, the strategy for crowd control of protesters was simple -- don't let the bastards in!

It's a strategy that works. They do it in China, in Egypt, why not in the good old U.S. of A? If people don't see the protests covered on TV, they didn't take place. It's that simple. Of course, so is a mugging.

But here's the greater point: It's a truism that democracy is much sloppier than dictatorships or democracies teetering on the edge of dictatorship. Democrats, thankfully, are still partial to keeping the great political experiment going. That's precisely what Jim Moran did with the audience plants as well as the sincerely disagreeable audience protesters. He gave them a chance to speak.

If protesters abused the opportunity by misrepresenting themselves, their identity or they tried to launch a rant, they were and relieved of their microphone and politely dismissed. If they were sincere in their disagreement with health reform, their issues were seriously addressed.

No one was allowed to monopolize the mike, grandstand the audience or at knee-cap Rep. Moran into capitulation. Information was transmitted, myths of what's in the various drafts of the health reform legislation were exposed - at least for those who preferred to be right rather than righteous. The evening was a success. A town hall meeting worth attending and worth watching. Thanks C-SPAN

As for the news cameras in the hall recording the heat of babble, that's just what their audiences got on the 10 o'clock news. Whatever informational nourishment they thought they would learn from the news that night, what their local news delivered was only a thin gruel, another exposure to Radical Republican Political Discourse: Hooliganism 101

I find it interesting that you criticize the Republicans alone. Democrats are just as guilty of bullying in the past. And don't forget President Obama encouraged his supporters to "get in the face" of those who disagreed during the election. Here is the link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/09/17/politics/p185733D40.DTL&type=p... Rather than criticize one side or the other for using these tactics, why don't you analyze why these protesters, planted or not, feel the need to do this? Do they need to the money? Are they scared of change? Has the current system worked for them? And what about all the town hall meetings that remain civil? We have had several here in Arizona recently, and no one got out of control, though there were many who do not support the proposed changes. Why is the media not reporting on those meetings? You seem a bit biased, sir, and I'm wondering if perhaps the media or democrats are in fact paying you off?

Mr. Fischoff tars only one side of the argument, but it is clear he is incapable of seeing the other. As an academic, I would expect no less of him. Academia has been the breeding ground for radicals for a long time now and Stuart Fischoff is emblematic of the result. Mr. Fischoff is the academic equivalent of an SEUI thug. He tries to do to the mind what they do to the body.
You lie about the plants in the audience. At Moran's townhall, people were secretly let into the hall to take up the first four rows and to man tables to give signs out to supporters of Moran. This has happened at other townhalls, preventing people who stood in line for their seats to get into the event. Shills have been outed at several Democratic events, but none at Republican events. Even the Obama events have been stacked. His event in Belgrade, MT had some 900 people stacked into the event.
I won't go into the the number of outright lies the Democrats have been caught in over HB 3200, as well as the President. That is fodder for a thesis or dissertation.
However, when people are lied to over and over, they have a tendency to become angry. And when they are lied to even more, or their questions are not answered, they become even angrier. Mr. Fischoff, had you been around during the American Revolution, you would have been considered a Loyalist. Try to think back, if you every took American history, and remember what happened to the Loyalists. If you cannot remember, you can probably Google it.
As someone who supposedly has some insight into media psychology, you are aware that if you cannot kill the message, you should try to kill the messenger. This is what you are trying to go, Mr. Fischoff, you are trying to kill the messenger.
Sadly, for you, it will not work. The message is not organized, it is viral. And as a viral message, it cannot be stopped. Just like Moran tried to stop the message when he asked a constituent to prove he lived in the area, the message went on. The paid lackeys of SEIU, ACORN, Americorps, etc. cannot drown out the message, and neither can you.
I knew pseudo-intellectuals like you in the academic community when I was getting my degrees and had little time for your rants against Republicans or conservatives. I have no more time for you know. Just know, that if HB 3200 is passed, you will die a lot earlier than under the pension you have now. You are really going against your best interests when you support Obamacare.

My first reaction to comments by Jennifer and Anonymous is "quod erat demonstrandum" (QED). But that's too glib, isn't it? If you both believe that the opposing side to this debate--the town hall disrupters-- have not been provided with a voice and a presence and really needs a defense or balancing nod from me, well, we must agree to disagree. To my mind and eye, it's their voices and placards and ..... that have dominated the news media.As for Democrats being disruptive, I'm sure they have been. But not right now and it is right now that the strategy seems to be bringing out the worst in our nation and the worst in us.

AS for why the people are so passionate and so frightened about health reform departing from the hyperinflated corporate model we now have, I think the answer is ignorance, misinformation and believing that their party leaders like Grassley, Boehner, Kyl, McConnell, et al, and talk show hosts like Limbaugh are speaking truth to the people but are really speaking nice nice to Wall Street, Pharma, the AMA, the list goes on.

As for the Democrats being no different than the Republicans regarding disrupting Republican town halls, I simply cannot agree. Nor do I find Democratic corporations or party officials sending off memos encouraging supporters to do exactly that as the news has amply shown recently. People who are democrats can be unruly but I've seen no evidence that the party suggests it or facilitates it or works in league with big business to sponsor it. But then, maybe I'm watching the wrong news stations and reading the wrong newspapers.

As for an early demise because of passage of health reform legislation, I sincerely doubt it. I enjoy the protection of Medicare and expect to continue to do so and live a little longer as a pseudo intellectual

First, thanks for taking the time to respond, Dr. Fischoff.
I am not a Republican, nor a Democrat. My votes are decided by analyzing the candidates, analyzing their positions, and choosing the person who I believe will do the best job for my city,state, and country according to what I believe is important.
I do not agree with the proposed health care bill because I have researched it (or at least begun to - it is so incredibly long!) There are both good and bad remedies to the health care crisis within the bill, but the math does not add up - as proposed, it will cost an enormous amount of money to implement - money that we do not have, nor will we have for a long time.
You state that those attending the town halls are ignorant and misinformed, but what do you base that on? Assumptions or research? Have you talked to any of them personally? I hope you are not basing your information on Pelosi and Reid soundbites. I have talked to many local people about this issue and they have educated themselves, like me, as opposed to listening to and trusting their leaders. The result of their research is the very reason why they do not agree with the proposed legislation. True, there are some trouble-makers out there, but the majority are simply concerned citizens who want their representatives to actually represent them. President Obama stated that he welcomed a good and healthy debate. Debate cannot occur without both sides stating their case. Hopefully, our leaders will listen to the concerns of all their constituents and fine-tune the health care bill accordingly.

I just spent 20 minutes replying to your above comment and then lost it when I hit the wrong button. Annoyed? You betcha!

So, let me just briefly review some points I was trying to make and skip the rest.

Hearing from you brightens my day. I agree that the costs of the proposed health care reform legislation is worrisome, even pie in the sky. We'll just have to wait until the final proposed version of the legislation is presented in some form to us and then petition our represeantatives regarding what we like and don't like.

I do talk to lots of people, in person, online, in emails, and many in fact merely parrot Republican and health industry talking points so I know they are not thinking, just taking their marching orders.

Some supporters of Obama's positions don't think either. They also parrot. This will always be so since we often rely on our "leaders" to do the thinking because we don't have the time or the education or the inclination to actually read the stuff that affects us.

I look forward to meeting more citizens like you, Jennifer. I would feel more optimistic about our nation's future.

Thanks for the article. While I don't agree with his some of his word choice (calling someone stupid is asking for trouble!), he raises some good point. In particular, people who are part of HMO's are already experiencing rationing - I am experiencing this frustrating situation at the moment with my daughter. In a discussion with some Democratic family members, I suggested that the best way to find a solution would be to analyze the health care systems of various countries, find out what works and doesn't work and make necessary adjustments. Unfortunately, and as you mentioned, people on both sides simply parrot their particular party's talking points. I think part of the problem, also, is that a lot of people get their information from the major networks, which rarely present "news" anymore, but instead offer a lot of commentary and opinion. Combined with the internet, we have information overload and it takes intentional effort to sort through it all to find the facts.
Thanks for hearing me out and hope you and yours are safe from the fires there in LA.

Fortunately, my wife and I moved from L.A. a few years ago and now reside in southern Illinois. No fires, no earthquakes, no riots, no police helicopters; just the occasional tornado warning and inland hurricanes on occasion. Oh, and beautiful sunsets.

Regardless of how well you apply your scientific method, you seem to only magnify your bigotry more with each "article". You could easily submit your work as parody. They could name you "the Archie Bunker of the Psychology Profession". You are the second writer I have come across for this publication (in a row) that has obvious ties to Unions and the union-led media circus. The irony here and in your June 14 article is that you are actually describing your group's reprobate behavior and atributing it to the normal people. By normal people, I mean hard-working, Christians and other conservatives. Your continued dehuminization of the majority in America only proves that you have an agenda. This disqualifies you from presenting your articles as objective works. Your attempt to be like your television idols you list in your man-crush article of July 25 showcases your immaturity and your bias. What you do not realize is that ridicule, no matter how darkly satirical or halarious has victims. http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/8stagesofgenocide.html